THE LEGISLATUREParental consent bill is derailedAn error gets a controversial plan on minors' abortions taken off House floor

Published 5:30 am, Wednesday, May 11, 2005

AUSTIN - A contentious bill that would require written parental consent for minors seeking abortions was derailed by opponents late Tuesday.

Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, said the bill violated procedure because it incorrectly listed a lawmaker as an author of the bill when he is not.

"The point of order is well-taken and sustained," said House Speaker Tom Craddick, who said the bill must be sent back to the Calendars Committee, where it must wait at least 36 hours before returning to the floor.

At the earliest, the House could take up the bill Thursday morning, the last day a House bill can be heard.

Most Popular

Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, the bill's author, said it was the first time he had heard of such a rule. Rep. Ryan Guillen, D-Rio Grande City, was incorrectly listed as an author.

King is still confident the bill will pass but said the delay means at least 20 other bills will not be heard.

The bill states that physicians must obtain a parent's written consent before performing an abortion on minors 17 or younger. Minors would also face tougher court tests to bypass the consent requirement.

"You can tell a minor they can't smoke, can't drink and can't quit school," King said before the bill was delayed. "You can tell them they can't enter into certain contracts, you can't marry, can't join the military, can't get a tattoo, can't get your ear pierced ... yet we allow them to make the decision to have an abortion."

Anti-abortion groups praise the bill for protecting parental rights, but abortion rights advocates protest that it would place the state's most vulnerable young women in jeopardy.

Under current law, minors must notify their parents before receiving an abortion but do not have to obtain their consent. Minors can obtain a judicial bypass to avoid the notification, if the she fears she may be abused because of the pregnancy.

"In none of those cases does a parent have a right to intervene to protect his or her daughter from an abortion," said Joe Pojman, executive director of the alliance.

"We think abortion should be like every other medical procedure in Texas in that parental consent is required," he said.

The Women's Health and Family Planning Association, however, said only 300 abortions performed since parental notification became law in 2000 resulted because a court waived the requirement that a parent be notified first.

Abortion rights advocates also note that in a state with one of the highest teen-pregnancy rates, King's bill does nothing to help prevent pregnancy.

"It just makes it one step more difficult," she added. "Anything that makes it more difficult causes women to seek avenues other than safe, legal procedures."

Current law allows a minor to seek a judicial bypass for notifying parents in any Texas county, but King's bill would limit court venues to the county where the minor resides or where she would have the abortion.

"Perhaps one of the most heinous parts is the judge now changes the evidentiary burden of proof from a preponderance of the evidence to clear and convincing evidence," said Peggy Romberg, chief executive officer of the Women's Health and Family Planning Associa- tion.

The issue is key, abortion rights advocates say, because it could make it more difficult to prove that a minor might be abused if a parent learns she is pregnant.

Also Tuesday night, a bill that would have reduced incentives to develop affordable housing for the poorest Texans was not debated because of a technical error.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, would have shifted the focus of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs toward apartments rather than home-ownership programs.

It would have removed the agency's authority to develop and revise rules for awarding low-income housing tax credits, the largest and most controversial state housing program.

Rep. Yvonne Davis, D-Dallas, said the committee time on the bill was incorrect, and it will be sent back to a committee. Because the deadline has passed for committees to pass bills, the measure is pretty much dead for the session.

The House also approved a measure that limits asbestos-related lawsuits. The bill's author, Rep. Joe Nixon, R-Houston, has been criticized because he works for a law firm that defends against asbestos claims.